Journal of Labor Research

, Volume 23, Issue 3, pp 375–395 | Cite as

Technological innovation and the trucking industry: Information revolution and the effect on the work process

  • Michael H. Belzer
Symposium Technological Change and Industrial Relations


The trucking industry has experienced a drastic change in competitive forces in the past 20 years. These changes have led to longer hours and lower wages and arguably to greater risk to drivers' health and safety. They have also led carriers to implement new technologies, especially information technology, to compete successfully. While basic freight handling has undergone marginal changes (manual fork lifts giving way to powered fork lifts; drag lines and hand carts giving way to conveyors), and various truck technology improvements have led to greater safety (anti-lock brakes and collision avoidance technology), the basic work process has not changed greatly. The greatest changes have come from the introduction of information technology. Carriers use sophisticated routing and scheduling algorithms to increase the efficiency of their dispatch systems and hence the efficiency with which they use labor. Modern computing systems, with processor speed and storage capabilities hundreds of times greater than those of the biggest and fastest computers a human generation ago, allow carriers to process information efficiently and maximize their use of resources. Satellites and other modern telecommunications devices have made it possible to communicate with the truck and driver, monitoring both the truck's mechanical activity and location as well as driver practices. With the advent of the Internet, carriers can attempt to track shipments and vehicles to provide nearly real time information management, overcoming one of the greatest transportation problems.


Collective Bargaining Industrial Relation Truck Driver Labor Relation Review National Labor Relation Board 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Baumol, William J. “Contestable Markets: An Uprising in the Theory of Industry Structure.” American Economic Review 72 (March 1982): 1–15.Google Scholar
  2. —. On the Theory of Contestable Markets. Cambridge: MIT Press, 1986.Google Scholar
  3. —, John C. Panzar, and Robert D. Willig. Contestable Markets and the Theory of Industry Structure. San Diego: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1982.Google Scholar
  4. Bearth, Daniel P. “Cass Logistics Formula Flaw Inflates Deregulation Savings.” Transport Topics. Alexandria, Va.: Transportation Topics Publishing Group, a division of the American Trucking Association, 1999, p. 4.Google Scholar
  5. Belman, Dale L. and Kristen A. Monaco. “The Effects of Deregulation, De-Unionization, Technology, and Human Capital on the Work and Work Lives of Truck Drivers.” Industrial and Labor Relations Review 54 (March 2001): 502–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Beizer, Michael. Collective Bargaining in the Trucking Industry: The Effects of Institutional and Economic Restructuring. Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University, 1993.Google Scholar
  7. —. “The Motor Carrier Industry: Truckers and Teamsters under Siege.” In Paula B. Voos, ed. Contemporary Collective Bargaining in the Private Sector. Madison, Wisc: Industrial Relations Research Association, 1994a, pp. 259–302.Google Scholar
  8. —. Paying the Toll: Economic Deregulation of the Trucking Industry. Washington, D.C.: Economic Policy Institute, 1994b.Google Scholar
  9. —. “Collective Bargaining After Deregulation: Do the Teamsters Still Count?” Industrial and Labor Relations Review 48 (July 1995): 636–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. —. Sweatshops on Wheels: Winners and Losers in Trucking Deregulation. New York: Oxford University Press, 2000.Google Scholar
  11. —. “Worker Representation in the Truckload Sector: What Do Truckers Want?” Proceedings of the 53rd Annual Meeting of the Industrial Relations Research Association, January 4, 2001, New Orleans, Louisiana. Urbana-Champaign: Industrial Relations Research Association, forthcoming.Google Scholar
  12. Call, Gregory D. and Theodore E. Keeler. Airline Deregulation, Fares, and Market Behavior: Some Empirical Evidence. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1985.Google Scholar
  13. Chapman, Paul K. Trouble on Board: The Plight of International Seafarers. Ithaca, N.Y.: ILR Press, 1992.Google Scholar
  14. Commission on the Future of Worker-Management Relations. “Fact Finding Report.” Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Labor; U.S. Department of Commerce, 1994a.Google Scholar
  15. Commission on the Future of Worker-Management Relations. “Report and Recommendations.” Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Labor; U.S. Department of Commerce, 1994b.Google Scholar
  16. Cooke, William N. and Frederick H. Gautschi 111. “Political Bias in NLRB Unfair Labor Practice Decisions.” Industrial and Labor Relations Review 35 (July 1982): 539–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Corsi, Thomas M. “Motor Carrier Industry Structure and Operations.” In International Symposium on Motor Carrier Transportation. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press, 1993.Google Scholar
  18. Donn, Clifford B. “Concession Bargaining in the Ocean-Going Maritime Industry.” Industrial and Labor Relations Review 42 (January 1989): 189–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Duke, John. “Productivity Measures for Transportation Industries.” In Highway Related Transportation Industries Productivity Measures Symposium. Washington, D.C., 1992. Mimeo in possession of the author.Google Scholar
  20. Freeman, Richard B. When Earnings Diverge: Causes, Consequences, and Cures for the New Inequality in the U.S. Washington, D.C.: National Policy Association, 1997.Google Scholar
  21. — and Joel Rogers. What Workers Want. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1999.Google Scholar
  22. Gould, William B. IV. Labored Relations. Boston: MIT Press, 2000.Google Scholar
  23. International Transport Workers' Federation. “Danger: Licences for Sale.” Journal of the International Transport Workers' Federation 2 (June 2001): 7–9.Google Scholar
  24. ITS International. “Chauffeur Aims to Relieve Truck Drivers.” ITS International 8 (January–February 1997): 67–68.Google Scholar
  25. Johnson, Nancy Brown. “Pay Levels in the Airlines Since Deregulation.” In Peter Cappelli, ed. Airline Labor Relations in the Global Era: The New Frontier. Ithaca, N.Y.: ILR Press/Cornell University Press, 1995, pp. 101–15.Google Scholar
  26. —. “Airline Industrial Relations Following Deregulation.” In The Proceedings of the 52nd Annual Meeting of the Industrial Relations Research Association. Champaign, Ill.: Industrial Relations Research Association, 2000, pp. 206–20.Google Scholar
  27. Leigh, Laurence E. “Contestability in Deregulated Airline Markets: Some Empirical Tests.” Transportation Journal 30 (Winter 1990): 49–57.Google Scholar
  28. Leiter, Robert D. The Teamsters Union: A Study of Its Economic Impact. New York: Octagon Books, 1957 (reprinted 1974).Google Scholar
  29. Morrison, Steven and Clifford Winston. “Empirical Implications and Tests of the Contestability Hypothesis.” Journal of Law and Economics 30 (April 1987): 53–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Peoples, James H. and Margaret Peteraf. “Deregulation and the Competitive Fringe: Owner-Operators in the Trucking Industry.” Journal of Regulatory Economics 7 (January 1995): 27–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Rakowski, James P. “The Nature of Competition in Common Carrier Trucking: Economic Theory Meets the Reality of the Marketplace.” In J. Rhoads Foster, George R. Hall, Stevan R. Holmberg, Charles F. Phillips Jr., and Richard L. Wallace, eds. Boundaries Between Competition and Economic Regulation. Washington, D.C.: Institute for Study of Regulation, 1983, pp. 179–89.Google Scholar
  32. —. “Victors and Victims in Less-than-Truckload Transport Since Deregulation.” Journal of Transportation Law, Logistics and Policy 62 (Summer 1995): 426–41.Google Scholar
  33. Roberts, Paul O. “Comments on ‘The U.S. Motor Carrier Industry Long After Deregulation’.” In Proceedings of the 35th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Forum, St. Louis, Mo.: October 21–22, 1992.Google Scholar
  34. Shepherd, William G. The Economics of Industrial Organization. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1979.Google Scholar
  35. —. “Contestability vs. Competition.” American Economic Review 74 (September 1984): 572–87.Google Scholar
  36. Talley, Wayne K. and Ann Schwarz-Miller. “Railroad Deregulation and Union Labor Earnings.” In James H. Peoples, ed. Regulatory Reform and Labor Markets. Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1998.Google Scholar
  37. Transportation Policy Associates. Serial. Transportation in America: A Statistical Analysis of Transportation in the United States. Washington, D.C.: Transportation Policy Associates.Google Scholar
  38. U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics. Occupational Outlook Handbook 2000-01. Bulletin 2520. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 2000.Google Scholar
  39. U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration. “Hours of Service of Drivers; Driver Rest and Sleep for Safe Operations; Proposed Rule; Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM);” 49 CFR parts 350, 390, 394, 395, and 398; published in the Federal Register Vol. 65 No. 85: 25539-25611), May 2, 2000.Google Scholar
  40. Walsh, David J. On Different Planes: An Organizational Analysis of Cooperation and Conflict among Airline Unions. Ithaca, N.Y.: ILR Press, 1994.Google Scholar
  41. Winston, Clifford, Thomas M. Corsi, Curtis M. Grimm, and Carol A. Evans. The Economic Effects of Surface Freight Deregulation. Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution, 1990.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  • Michael H. Belzer
    • 1
  1. 1.Wayne State UniversityDetroit

Personalised recommendations